Tag: Value

Saints have 18th-most draft capital in NFL this year

Will the Saints be big players in the 2024 NFL draft? Most of their picks are in the later rounds, which hurts their value, but don’t rule out Mickey Loomis:

Are the New Orleans Saints going to be big players in the 2024 NFL draft? You never know with Mickey Loomis, but other teams are better positioned to make a move early on. New Orleans owns a lot of draft picks but most of them are distributed in the later rounds, where they’re less valuable.

In addition to a first-round pick, the Saints have 8 other selections on Days 2 and 3. Five of those are compensatory selections, which were just handed out on Friday. Tankathon ranked every team based on its draft capital this year, applying point values to each selection, and the Saints have the 18th-most among the NFL’s 32 teams.

Their nine picks are worth 761.8 points, slightly ahead of the 19th-ranked Tennessee Titans (758.2). The Arizona Cardinals have the most capital in the NFL (1,468.9 points), followed by the Washington Commanders (1,236.6) and Chicago Bears (1,089.5). The Cleveland Browns have by far the least amount of capital with only five picks worth 377.8 points.

The Saints could use draft capital this year to move around the draft with some wheeling and dealing, but they also have a tendency to dip into future assets as well. Don’t expect Loomis to stand pat and let the board come to him on draft day, especially when he has a history of using compensatory picks as bartering chips to trade for higher picks.

[lawrence-auto-related count=4]

Cowboys roster ranks 3rd in value; Lamb, Bland make ‘best value’ team

From @ToddBrock24f7: CeeDee Lamb and DaRon Bland were the top values at their respective positions in 2023, while 8 other Cowboys made the top 10 at theirs.

The world-weary cynics within Cowboys Nation firmly believe that, at least to the Jones family, finishing the season strong in dollars and cents is way more important than wins and losses.

On the field, Dallas didn’t make it out of the wild-card round. But financially, the front office finished almost at the top of the league when it comes to the overall value they got out of their players this season.

Spotrac has determined their 2023 Team Value Rankings using scores calculated for each player on the league’s rosters. Individually, a player’s cumulative production is factored against his average annual salary, and the resulting score (out of 100) offers a look at how much bang a player provides for his buck.

Do that for everybody, and it becomes clear which teams make their money work the hardest come gametime.

San Francisco led the NFL with a “True Value Score” (TVS) of 99.56, while Baltimore came in second with 95.11. The Cowboys finished in third place with 91.38. No other team scored in the 90s. (Within the NFC East, Philadelphia finished 16th with 52.48, the Giants were 28th at 16.44, and Washington ended 31st with 6.11.)

Using players’ individual scores, Spotrac also assembled their “Best Value” roster, spotlighting the player with the highest TVS at each position. The Dallas was one of four teams to put two players in the hypothetical starting lineup; eight other Cowboys made the top 10 at their positions.

Here’s a look at who was named the absolute best value at their spot, as well as which players on the team still gave great production at a nice price.

[affiliatewidget_smgtolocal]

How did Packers do in draft value relative to 2023 consensus board?

Using the wisdom of the crowd, we assess how the Packers did in the 2023 draft relative to the consensus big board.

How did the Green Bay Packers do in terms of value during the 2023 NFL draft? This is a tough question to answer. Maybe impossible.

Value is an important part of the draft process. An understanding of the board is vital to judging how teams went about maximizing value during the draft.

However, establishing true “value” is incredibly difficult. Thirty-two teams have thirty-two different draft boards, and there is no consensus big board for all teams. Teams scout differently and have different schemes, coaching staffs and needs.

The best we can do is base value on the consensus of the information available.

Arif Hasan of PFN creates the go-to consensus board, which ranks the top 300 players in the draft class based on more than 70 different big boards from draft analysts. As Hasan says, “the consensus of these experts does a better predictive job than individual experts.” Wisdom of the crowd. The collective is better than the opinion of one.

Here are the Packers’ picks in the 2023 draft, their consensus rank, their pick number and the difference between the two. This is how we’ll establish value. For players not on the big board, difference was determined based on 259 total picks made.

Player Consensus rank Pick number Difference
Lukas Van Ness 17 13 -4
Luke Musgrave 47 42 -5
Jayden Reed 86 50 -36
Tucker Kraft 61 78 +17
Colby Wooden 123 116 -7
Sean Clifford N/A 149 -110
Dontayvion Wicks 171 159 -12
Karl Brooks 113 179 +66
Anders Carlson N/A 207 -52
Carrington Valentine 205 232 +27
Lew Nichols III N/A 235 -24
Anthony Johnson Jr. 218 242 +24
Grant DuBose 236 256 +20
Total -96

This exercise is complicated by the fact that the Packers took three players (Clifford, Carlson and Nichols) who weren’t on the top 300 big board. All three will have to be considered big “reaches” relative to the big board, but we don’t know how big generally. In terms of the consensus, Clifford, Carlson and Nichols were all expected to be undrafted free agents. The three picks lost the Packers 186 value points.

The good news: the Packers other 10 picks gained 90 points of value overall.

The team’s first five picks all stayed fairly close to the big board when assessing the group overall (-35). Then things got squirrely. Clifford was a reach (Packers explain here), and taking a kicker usually means straying far from the big board. Nichols wasn’t on the big board but can hardly be considered a reach.

Although Reed was a moderate reach at No. 50, the Packers did trade back twice before selecting him, gaining picks at No. 159 (Wicks) and No. 179 (Brooks). Together, the three picks were actually good for 18 total value points relative to consensus.

Biggest reach: Clifford
Biggest steal: Brooks

Ultimately, the Packers took players in expected ranges until straying for a quarterback and kicker on Day 3. And they got great value on Brooks in the sixth and decent value with at least three picks in the seventh round.

Again, this isn’t a perfect exercise. In most cases, a team just doesn’t want to take a player considerably higher than the consensus, and the Packers did that a few times in this draft, but mostly for a backup quarterback and a specialist.

Overall, the process looked good relative to consensus. In fact, you could swap a few picks around (say, Reed for Kraft, Clifford for Brooks, or Carlson for Johnson) and the value would line up very well with the big board. The Packers didn’t want to lose out on a quarterback and kicker they liked, so they went earlier than expected.

[mm-video type=playlist id=01eqbxb1xg7g19wqdc player_id=01eqbvhghtkmz2182d image=]

How NFL draft trade value charts graded the Saints-Bears deal

How NFL draft trade value charts graded the Saints-Bears deal for Old Dominion right tackle Nick Saldiveri:

The New Orleans Saints and Chicago Bears completed a surprise trade in the minutes leading up to the fourth round of the 2023 NFL draft, which helped the Saints vault up the board while the Bears moved down a dozen spots (adding a fifth-round pick for their trouble). New Orleans selected Old Dominion right tackle Nick Saldiveri with their new pick.

So how did the various NFL draft trade value charts floating around grade this move? Legendary coach Jimmy Johnson is credited for first introducing the model that all others are based off of, but these days there are multiple variants to consider. Teams use their own models so there’s some variance from one war room to the next. Let’s see what they made of the Saints-Bears trade:

Since 2011, no GM has lost more draft pick value in trades than Saints’ Mickey Loomis

No NFL general manager has lost more draft pick value in trades than Mickey Loomis, whose always-aggressive approach has cost the Saints from time to time:

Sometimes you get the bear, sometimes he gets you. And when you trade up as often as the New Orleans Saints have under Mickey Loomis, you tend to pay a higher price than you’d like. The latest illustration of this comes from Pro Football Focus analyst Arjun Menon, who created a graph showing the net trade value gained or lost by every active NFL general manager dating back to 2011 (when a new collective bargaining agreement introduced the modern rookie wage scale, dramatically shifting how draft picks are valued).

And no general manager has lost more value for his team than Loomis — who, to be fair, shares a lot of blame with former Saints head coach Sean Payton for the aggressive draft strategy. New Orleans has traded away future picks to move up in the current draft more frequently than many other teams around the league. Look at their history:

  • 2022: Traded a 2023 first-round pick to get another selection in the first round (spent on LT Trevor Penning)
  • 2020: Traded a 2021 third-round pick to move up for LB Zack Baun in the third round
  • 2020: Traded a 2021 sixth-round pick to land TE Tommy Stevens in the seventh round
  • 2019: Traded a 2020 second-round pick to move up for C Erik McCoy in the second round
  • 2018: Traded a 2019 first-round pick to move up for DE Marcus Davenport in the first round
  • 2017: Traded a 2018 second-round pick to land RB Alvin Kamara in the third round
  • 2016: Traded a 2017 fifth-round pick to move up for DT David Onyemata in the fourth round
  • 2015: Traded a 2016 sixth-round pick to move up for CB Damian Swann in the fifth round
  • 2011: Traded a 2012 first-round pick to land RB Mark Ingram in the first round

If you’re keeping track, that’s a total of six picks in the first, second, and third rounds traded to move up and get Ingram, Kamara, Davenport, McCoy, Baun and Penning. And we aren’t even counting the many trades that only included packaging up late-round picks in the current draft, only future assets. It’s early for Penning, but of that group you could only say it was worth it with certainty for Ingram, Kamara and McCoy.

Why trade up so often? The Saints work with a smaller big board of draft prospects than most other teams, viewing the pre-draft process as a series of disqualifications to limit their options to players who best fit what they’re looking for. Many teams often have 120 to 150 draftable grades on their board. New Orleans usually has 75 to 90. So when a player they value is just outside of reach, they’re comfortable making a move to go get them. At the same time, they don’t see as much value in trading down; Loomis hasn’t moved back in the draft since 2007.

The Saints have a strategy that is tough to beat when it works. But their eagerness to trade up can get them burned, especially when the players they covet don’t meet expectations. Trading up so often has a cost that’s paid in the later rounds, when teams need to get depth players. When the Saints miss on a player like Davenport after trading up, and lose key contributors in free agency, it’s really difficult to field a competitive roster. Hopefully they’ll learn from that and tweak the strategy.

[lawrence-auto-related count=3]

[stnvideo key=”IWnW6yH0kX-2607430-7618″ type=”float”]

Nick Saban: ‘There’s only so much money to go around’

Nick Saban doesn’t hide his feelings while discussing the adverse effects of NIL.

[autotag]Nick Saban[/autotag] has never been one to shy away from giving his opinion, and typically for good reason. Nobody has been more successful at the collegiate level.

In an interview with CBS Sports’ Josh Pate, Saban discussed his views on name, image, likeness (NIL), and the direction it might steer college athletics.

Saban discusses college sports are supposed to put athletes on the right path to develop to be the best person they can be, it’s not about the money.

In a passionate response, Saban said, “It’s going to be about who pays me the most money. When you use that in recruiting then it becomes I’m just gonna go where I can get the best deal rather than focus on where can I go to create the most value for my future.”

It will be interesting to see how Coach Saban continues to handle the growth of NIL into college athletics.

[mm-video type=video id=01g7zjgv5gvprdr0s0p1 playlist_id=01eqbz6mkdd99nyvkm player_id=01eqbvp13nn1gy6hd4 image=https://images2.minutemediacdn.com/image/upload/video/thumbnail/mmplus/01g7zjgv5gvprdr0s0p1/01g7zjgv5gvprdr0s0p1-84dedc5957cc29a92113c10feed52cf6.jpg]

[lawrence-related id=53268]

[lawrence-related id=53231]

Contact/Follow us @RollTideWire on Twitter, and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Alabama news, notes and opinion. You can also follow Sam Murphy on Twitter @SamMurphy02.

Let us know your thoughts, comment on this story below. Join the conversation today!

How did Packers do in draft value relative to 2022 consensus board?

Comparing the Packers’ draft picks in 2022 to The Athletic’s consensus big board. How did Green Bay do value-wise?

How did the Green Bay Packers do in terms during the 2022 NFL draft? This is a tough question to answer. Maybe impossible.

Value is an important part of the draft process. An understanding of the board is vital to judging how teams went about maximizing value during the draft.

However, establishing true “value” is incredibly difficult. Thirty-two teams have thirty-two different draft boards, and there is no consensus big board for all teams. Teams scout differently and have different schemes, coaching staffs and needs.

The best we can do is base value on the consensus of the information available.

Arif Hasan of The Athletic creates the go-to consensus board, which ranks the top 300 players in the draft class based on 82 different big boards from draft analysts. As Hasan says, “the consensus of these experts does a better predictive job than individual experts.”

Here are the Packers’ picks in the 2022 draft, their consensus rank, their pick number and the difference between the two. This is how we’ll establish value.

Player Consensus rank Pick number Difference
Quay Walker 51 22 -29
Devonte Wyatt 27 28 +1
Christian Watson 49 34 -15
Sean Rhyan 79 92 +13
Romeo Doubs 139 132 -7
Zach Tom 126 140 +14
Kingsley Enagbare 75 179 +104
Tariq Carpenter N/A 228 -72
Jonathan Ford N/A 234 -66
Rasheed Walker 113 249 +136
Samori Toure 291 258 -33
Totals +46

Overall, the Packers actually didn’t waver much from the consensus board and actually gained 46 spots of value. The one caveat: Carpenter and Ford weren’t in the top 300 of the consensus board, so it’s unclear how big of a “reach” each of those seventh-round picks actually was. We took away value equal to both being No. 300. In many ways, this isn’t a perfect exercise.

The consensus board says the Packers reached a bit for Quay Walker in the first round (but note: he was a late riser in the process, at least in the media) and Watson in the second round, but all that value was made up and more on Day 3. Getting Enagbare in the fifth round and Rasheed Walker in the seventh round represented two of the very best values in the entire draft. Many thought Enagbare and Rasheed Walker would go on Day 2. The Packers got them deep into Day 3.

Rasheed Walker was actually the best “value” at +136. It’s possible he’ll become a starter at offensive tackle down the road. A knee injury suffered last season took away his pre-draft process, possibly resulting in his fall down the board. Enagbare was +104; he could be a future starter at edge rusher. The Packers seemed surprised both were available at their respective spots. To get two great values at premium positions has to be considered a huge win.

Not including Carpenter and Ford, who are clearly the two biggest reaches in the team’s draft class, the Packers’ next biggest reach was Toure, the last pick in the draft. The value of the class will take a big hit if Quay Walker, at -29, is a bust. A reach in the first round can be killer, but no one will care (or should care) where the Packers picked him if Quay Walker becomes a Pro Bowler.

Remember this quote from Packers director of football ops Milt Hendrickson, who learned it from longtime Ravens general manager Ozzie Newsome: “A pick is just a pick until it becomes a player. From that standpoint, if you love the player, you find the way to get him.”

Overall, the Packers drafted five top-100 players on the consensus board despite trading away one of their top-100 picks in moving up for Watson. Five of the picks were considered good value compared to the consensus board; six were reaches. Five of the picks were +/- 15 spots, including four of the top five picks. Variance increases the further down the board the draft goes.

[listicle id=80800]

Breaking down Packers’ aggressive trade up to get WR Christian Watson

The Packers paid a big price to trade up to No. 34 and get WR Christian Watson in the 2022 NFl draft. We break down the move through trade value charts.

The Green Bay Packers sent both second-round picks to the Minnesota Vikings to move up 19 spots and select receiver Christian Watson with the second pick of the second round of the 2022 NFL draft.

The move up the board was a costly one for the Packers.

The trade details: The Packers sent the No. 53 overall pick and No. 59 overall pick to the Vikings for the No. 34 overall pick.

According to the Rich Hill model, the Packers gave up 197 points of value (No. 53: 106 points, No. 59: 91 points) to get the 34th pick, which is worth 175 points. The difference is 22 points, which is worth roughly a mid-fourth-round pick.

According to the Jimmy Johnson model, the Packers gave up 680 points of value (No. 53: 370 points, No. 59: 310 points) to get the 34th pick, which is worth 560 points. The difference is 120 points, which is worth roughly a late third-round pick.

According to the Fitzgerald-Spielberger model, the Packers gave up 1,922 points of value (No. 53: 988 points, No. 59: 934 points) to get the 34th pick, the Packers gave up which is worth 1,213 points. The difference is 709 points, which is worth roughly a late third-round pick.

The Packers attempted to move up to No. 32 overall in the first round to get Watson on Thursday night but were unable to get a deal done. The move up was completed to start Friday, but the Packers had a pay a big price to get it done.

The Packers aren’t worried about what was given up value-wise because they like the player so much.

“A pick is just a pick until it becomes a player,” Packers director of football operations Milt Hendrickson said. “From that standpoint, if you love the player, you find the way to get him.”

[listicle id=80411]

Packers entering 2022 NFL draft rich in picks and capital

The Packers have a lot of draft picks and a lot of draft capital. It’s an ideal place to be for GM Brian Gutekunst entering the 2022 draft.

The Green Bay Packers will go into the 2022 NFL draft with an ideal combination of draft pick volume and draft pick capital.

General manager Brian Gutekunst has 11 draft picks, including five in the first 100 picks. Only the Jacksonville Jaguars and Kansas City Chiefs have more (12). The picks are valuable, too: According to Tankathon, the Packers rank 10th in the NFL in draft pick capital, based on the Jimmy Johnson trade value chart. The picks are ranked in the top eight of teams on other trade value charts, including Rich Hill and Fitzgerald-Spielberger.

A good football team returning its four-time NFL MVP quarterback now has a real chance to build on the foundation of a winning future.

There is work to be done on the roster, especially after losing so much production and snaps at wide receiver and along the offensive line. Gone are Davante Adams, Za’Darius Smith, Billy Turner, Marquez Valdes-Scantling and others. But the Packers, who have won 13 regular-season games each of the last three seasons, can now supplement the roster and add a surplus of young, cheap talent in hopes of gearing up for another run.

Having a lot of picks and capital should also provide opportunities to move around during the draft, including up the board in the first round. Gutekunst has traded up three times for players in the first round during his first four drafts in charge of the Packers, so an aggressive player for a top player could be in the cards. Both of the Packers’ first-round picks are in the 20s. Moving up into the teens could put Gutekunst in a position to nab an instant impact player at a position of need, such as wide receiver or edge rusher.

Of course, having the volume and capital of draft picks means nothing if the Packers don’t pick the right players. This is an important draft for Gutekunst; he must find a way to balance the immediate needs of a Super Bowl contender with building out the long-term foundation of the roster. Aaron Rodgers is back for 2022 but there’s no guarantee he’ll be around longer than one more year. The Packers need players who can contribute right away, especially at receiver. But hitting on good players with developmental potential throughout the draft class will be vital to keeping the Packers in the position of a contender regardless of whether Rodgers is back in 2023 or not.

Packers draft picks

First round, 22nd overall
First round, 28th overall
Second round, 53rd overall
Second round, 59th overall
Third round, 92nd overall
Fourth round, 132nd overall
Fourth round, 140th overall
Fifth round, 171st overall
Seventh round, 229th overall
Seventh round, 250th overall
Seventh round, 259th overall

[listicle id=79664]

Wisconsin is one of the most valuable NCAA football programs according to Forbes

Wisconsin is one of the most valuable NCAA football programs according to Forbes

The Wisconsin football program broke the Top 25 of a recent Forbes list of the most valuable NCAA football programs.

The list, as tweeted by FOX College Football, listed Wisconsin at No. 23 with a valuation of $86 million. It is the seventh-most-valuable Big Ten program, coming in behind Ohio State at No. 5, Penn State at No. 13, Nebraska at No. 10, Iowa at No. 21 and Michigan State at No. 22.

Related: Wisconsin S Collin Wilder to miss Las Vegas Bowl with injury

No. 23 is up one spot from where the program was when the list was released in 2018. Big movers in that time include Georgia vaulting up to No. 8, Clemson entering the Top 25 and Texas tieing Texas A&M for the top spot.

Contact/Follow us @TheBadgersWire on Twitter, and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Wisconsin news, notes, opinion and analysis.